Stop playing single player so much and play with friends, the games become much more enjoyable.

Playing a game with friends can be more enjoyable for sure but that doesn't make a bad game/developer any less bad.

Originally Posted by MMOTotal

Blizzard stick to what they know, obviously that will not appeal to everyone.

And that's fine, I mean it seemed to mostly work for the Pokemon series(B/W is really not much different from R/B/Y) but that doesn't mean a developer can't be more innovative while still using the basis of their tried and true methods.

(Note: I'm not directing this specifically at Blizzard but all developers in general.)

That's what innovation is, improving on something established. That's what Blizzard has always done, until recently where they basically just copy their own games again in worse ways (SC2, while much better than D3, is just as guilty. You could say Cata brings no new innovation)

Diablo series was an innovation because it took action in RPGs to a whole new level, WoW innovated the MMORPG formula made by games like EQ. Their early RTS games improved upon the earlier RTS games like Dune 2, etc.

It just doesn't seem to work as well when they take their own games and try to improve them

Sorry, but no you could not say that. Cataclysm brought many innovations. If your gaze is primarily at end-game when you think innovation, try again.

No, no don't wanna be a hipster but a big star
And I wanna see my name tattooed where your tits are

Sorry, but no you could not say that. Cataclysm brought many innovations. If your gaze is primarily at end-game when you think innovation, try again.

Technically any change could be called innovation, however I think it is a bit silly to say things like "we copied this feature from here and pasted it over here" are innovative. Cataclysm had some minor changes, but innovative? By the strictest definition of the word yeah... by in the real world I don't think "copy/paste" or "now with more sparkles!" count as innovation.

I've always felt that Blizzard doesn't really innovate all that much, they mostly polish and perfect. That's not to say that they don't innovate, but their strength lies in taking some tried and true mechanics and then iterating and improving them better than anyone else in the industry.

Exactly this. Blizzard never did any groundbreaking innovation. They are doing "average" games in terms of gameplay mechanics and ideas, but polish it to the state of perfect diamond. Blizzard games were always a really good craftsmanship, not artistic "all crazy ideas" type. They never had very complex story, weird innovative gameplay etc. What's more atm they are sticking to their franchises - they can't go too far from the oryginals, fans want to play new versions of old hits, not completely different games. That's why SC 2 is so close to SC 1. That's why D3 is close to D2.. "Don't fix what's not broken"..

Originally Posted by Archaeon

In tbc everyone wished they were playing vanilla. In cataclysm everyone will wish they were playing wotlk.

Bad - This is a bad player, he refuses to learn how to play correctly.
Casual - This is a player that will let everything else take priority over wow.
Hardcore - This is a player that is fine with putting things on hold while he's on wow.
Bad/Good - Measure of Skill.
Casual/Hardcore - Measure of Time

Warcraft I, the first RTS game to bring a robust unit based skill system that could change the tide of battle if used right for the populace (And ability to select more than 1 unit at the time if I remember right, Dune lacked this feature)

Wrong. I could have sworn there was a method of selecting multiple units in Dune 2. Shift clicking maybe? I don't remember after so long. I know I didn't select every Fremen unit individually to attack a structure. I just can't find any evidence of it from a quick Google search, so all I can state is that my belief is that you are wrong. And I'm also assuming that your definition of "unit based skill system" means upgrades. Wrong again. Again I'll swear that Dune 2 had a research facility, for upgrading units, but even if it didn't, the original Command and Conquer I think did.

Originally Posted by Wilian

Warcraft 2, the first RTS that let you drag over the units with mouse to select multiple units at once, also including improvements to their previous system of unit abilities and controllability of them

Wrong again, but going back to the first issue. Even if it wasn't available in Dune 2, and I believe it was (come on, it was more than 20 years ago), I know for a FACT that Command and Conquer, released well before WC, had such a function.

Originally Posted by Wilian

Diablo, originally intended as roguelike turn based item hunting game but at later stages developed into a an action hack'n'slash that would create entire genre of new games that to the date still spreads further

There were other games that closely followed the idea of "dungeon crawling" well before Diablo came out. It's just that Diablo was the first top down 3D hack and slash, so I will give you that one.

Originally Posted by Wilian

Starcraft/Brood Wars, the first RTS to really introduce heavily tied in narrative to a RTS games with well developed world shared along 3 faction that went through a progressive story one by one

Wrong again to an extent, Dune 2 had multiple factions but it admittedly relied on people being aware of who the Atreides, Harkonen, and Ordos (to a lesser extent) were.

Originally Posted by Wilian

Warcraft 3, the final stage of Warcraft "evolution" of unit abilities with controllable heroes being able to level up and improve skills on the way (Did you know Warcraft 3 was originally planned to be an RPG?)

Ok, as far as I know, you're correct on this one. Though the whole "hero" system often was as much of a hinderance as a help at times.

Originally Posted by Wilian

World of Warcraft, the first MMO to introduce huge open world MMO without loading screen (Yah yah, continental differences), downplayed by EQ devs saying it was impossible for hardware demands, yet pulling it off. Also the pioneers of the modern instancing system we have in every MMO. It was really in it's child's steps at the time WoW was released. Some of the MMO's of the time tried to copy it while WoW was in beta due to their immense succees.

Ok, WoW got rid of loading screens SO LONG AS YOU WERE ON THE SAME CONTINENT. This is a given. But current instancing? Wrong. Ever heard of Anarchy Online? That was the first MMO to my knowledge that used instanced areas. And it uses Diablo style RANDOM instancing for missions to boot, on top of fixed instances for raids.

Originally Posted by Wilian

And now?

Starcraft 2 that plays exactly like SC, but with a bit more variation to the single player missions and new units
WoW expansions, adding new content but hardly anything new and innovative in the terms of gaming scene that wouldn't been done before, just iterating
Diablo 3, the same hack'n'slash as before with remade skill trees that has yet to show that they can sustain the game for as long as Diablo 2's replayability through leveling for different specs did.

From my point of view, it looks really grim and for last 8 or so years, Blizzard has done nothing more but trying to play it sure to keep sales, instead of pushing things forward that really gave them the reputation they have and what us who grew with Blizzard games have known to learn to expect from them. Sad times from my PoV.

(And for personal opinion remark, can't even start to comprehend how low their storytelling capabilities has gone with all these retcons, saturday morning cartoon enemies and Indiana Jones spoofs)

I will totally agree with you on this. The main innovation Blizzard has ever had was their storytelling, though the SC universe was a stretch considering it stole so much from Alien 2.

It would also explain why SC: Ghost died in Development Hell. They couldn't come up with innovations that would make SC:G stick out above the other FPS games coming out at the time, so they just gave up and killed the whole idea.

So instead they have been rehashing the same old ideas for more than a decade, and have lucked out that people dig what they spew. But that's not going to last forever. I know that Pandarens were around well before Kung-Fu Panda, but that doesn't matter when people see it as a rip-off of that Not-So-Classic Dreamworks endeavor. Simply put, Blizzard's innovation is fading. It's only a matter of time before someone else steps up to the plate to the knock the 800 lb gorilla out. I'm just hoping it's sooner than later. Hate paying for a game that is the most polished but the least innovative after so many years. Why oh WHY didn't Bioware have LFG queues available at release?!?!

Halo 2 was the most horrible game ive ever played in term of s sequel it was also the worst. It kill the entire franchise for me and have never picked up another game since thats what the company delivers now. The first Halo still remains one of the best games ive ever played. Your statement is a fallacy because not EVERYONE liked the second game. Just like not everyone likes the concept of MoP just like not everyone likes how short D3 is. Blizz can showcase some of the most beautiful CGI movies ive ever seen but wow is still an unpolished turd catered to the masses so those who play on moms computer can still play without problems.

Did you play it online? Or did you just blitz the singleplayer and then claim it was the worst halo game ever made? If you just did singleplayer i can see why you say this, but halo 2 was primarly a multiplayer game with a singleplayer added as an afterthought, not only did it revolutionize console fps gameing, but it helped shaped xbox live and console online to what it is today.

What exactly did you expect out of Diablo 3? The game certainly isn't a reskinned D2, but the core mechanics are more or less the same. But, if Blizzard were to change those, then it wouldn't really be Diablo, would it?

Everytime someone says this i have to ask, did you play diablo 2? The mechanics are no where near the same. The game runs differently, your clicking a quest 95% of the time while playing, Its next to impossible for a friend to join you due to 30 million quests and them prob not being ont he same quest, there is no offline due to the stupid drm blizzard wants to enforce, Items are so jacked that magic items are ussually the best out there, beating legendarys and set and rares.

Im not a hardcore Blizzard fan i enjoyed wow for a time if anything Sc2 and Diablo 3 are both unbelievably short in terms of story as you you can finish both within a day
shore its nice for a little nostalgia but i cant see it anything beyond that and people cant try and fight that to the death but at the end of the day it has truth

Because it could be better?[COLOR="red"]
That's not an excuse. If you can make a good game or a bad game, do the good one.

It could also be worse, so many opinions going around how things are bad or could be better, maybe just maybe take a step back and accept there are a lot of people who disagree with you (and ofc a lot who agree) but accept that the whole thing is just an opinion that is not shared by everyone.

For me personally my opinion is that D3 maybe should have been 1 or 2 acts longer however that in no way has ruined my enjoyment of the game. The gameplay itself is diablo all over and I love it, as I also love SC2 and WoW.

I must admit I personally find this whole innovative arguement thing silly as it quite frankly doesnt matter, if they make a game I enjoy I quite frankly dont care how they got there, however I do respect people have their own views and want to share them, as long as they understand that those views are not shared by all.

Blizzard has never been innovative. They don't innovate, they refine and polish. Pretty much every game they have ever made was copied from a market leader and refined.

This is how it is. It is a bit sad that one of the biggest developer is a refiner, not an inventor, but it shows what ppl want. Innovation is much less appreciated than polish and Blizzard delivers what ppl want the most. You can't really bash them for that.

I'm sorry but are you saying Blizzard didn't innovate with Diablo 3? Diablo 3 is an example of what happens when you innovate with the Diablo 2 formula. Torchlight 2 is an example of what happens when you don't.

TL2 is on a comparable level of fun though, where people are arguing minor details of who does what better between TL2 and D3. General consensus is that they're both great games (disregarding many qualms people have with D3 currently with online-only play, AH, and bugs). Difference is, one you'll be able to get for $15-20 and the other for $60. Given the price points, you really have to consider the expectations people have from D3 and what Blizzard must deliver on at that price point.

I'm only in the beta of TL2 and I can't believe I'll be getting it for the cost of a month of WoW. :P (buy a 4-pack for $60, split it among friends for $15/ea)

Originally Posted by Otaka

Its not possible to make a fresh game. Everything has been done so far.

Even a Street Cleaning Simulator is out there.

Not entirely true. GW2 is a noteworthy entry to the MMO genre, given the dynamic questing, active gameplay (no auto-attack), breaking the rules of standard healer, tank, dps, and how players experience their content and progress. I'm not even scratching the surface, but you get what I'm saying.

I will totally agree with you on this. The main innovation Blizzard has ever had was their storytelling, though the SC universe was a stretch considering it stole so much from Alien 2.

Alien 2? Its almost a carbon copy of the Warhammer:40k universe.

This is the tale not of the Horde as it exists today, a loose organization of orc,tauren,forsaken,troll, and blood elf, but of the rise of the very first Horde. Its birth, like that of any infant, was marked by blood and pain, and its harsh cries for life meant death to its enemies.

...maybe just maybe take a step back and accept there are a lot of people who disagree with you (and ofc a lot who agree) but accept that the whole thing is just an opinion that is not shared by everyone.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. You questioned why companies change good games. I told you they do to make them even better. There are people that disagree that Diablo could be better? And those people are "a lot"?

I must admit I personally find this whole innovative arguement thing silly as it quite frankly doesnt matter [...] as long as they understand that those views are not shared by all.

Some things are opinions, some things are logic. Game design has both. You don't need to share my opinions, but logic... that's not a matter of sharing.